| Course | BUS 552 Innovative Finance and Venture Capital |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 8 |
| Paper type | Research and development valuation |
| Length | About 1,076 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | MBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for BUS 552 Module 8
One Chance in Five of Reaching Patients: A Risk-Adjusted Valuation of a Biotech Startup's Lead Drug Candidate
Student Name
MBA Program, Aspen University
BUS 552: Innovative Finance and Venture Capital
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
One Chance in Five of Reaching Patients: A Risk-Adjusted Valuation of a Biotech Startup's Lead Drug Candidate
Harbor Point Therapeutics, a composite biotech startup in Boston, Massachusetts, is developing an oral drug for a rare inflammatory skin disease that causes painful lesions and has few effective treatments. The drug completed a Phase 1 trial in healthy volunteers, showing it was well tolerated. The company now seeks $30 million to run a Phase 2 trial in patients. Investors must decide what the program is worth. Most drug candidates fail, and a valuation that ignores this would be badly misleading. This paper values the candidate with risk-adjusted net present value.
Why Research Needs Risk Adjustment
In most capital budgeting, uncertainty is reflected in a discount rate. In drug development, the largest risk is binary and specific to the project: the drug works and is approved, or it fails. Wong et al. (2019), analyzing more than 400,000 entries for clinical trials of drugs, estimated that about 13.8% of programs that entered Phase 1 eventually reached approval across all disease areas, with much lower rates in oncology and higher rates in some other areas, including certain rare diseases. Because failure risk is specific to each program, it is handled most transparently by weighting cash flows by the probability that the program survives to produce them, then discounting at a rate that reflects market risk.
Why Costs Are So High
DiMasi et al. (2016) put the full cost behind each newly approved medicine, once time and abandoned candidates are counted, at roughly $2.6 billion, counting the costs of the many candidates that fail and the time value of money over a decade or more of development. Their estimate is for large companies' programs and includes failures across a portfolio. For a single small company's candidate, the lesson is that later-stage trials are expensive, that each stage must be weighed against the probability of reaching the next, and that most of the money at risk is spent before success is known.
The Development Path
The probabilities reflect published rates for rare disease programs, adjusted for the strength of Phase 1 data and the disease's measurable endpoints. Because orphan drug programs often run smaller Phase 3 trials, the company's estimates of Phase 3 costs are below the industry average. The cumulative probability of reaching patients from today, accounting for a small chance of failure in launch, is about 21%.
| Stage | Cost | Duration | Probability of advancing | Cumulative probability of reaching the next stage from today |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phase 2 | $30 million | 2 years | 45% | 45% |
| Phase 3 | $110 million | 3 years | 60% | 27% |
| Regulatory review | $5 million | 1 year | 85% | 23% |
| Launch and sales | Not applicable | 12 years of sales | Not applicable | 23% |
The Valuation
If the drug is approved, the company projects peak sales of about $900 million a year in the United States and Europe, reached four years after launch, with high margins typical of rare disease drugs. The present value of those sales, net of costs, at approval in year six would be about $950 million; discounted to today at 11%, about $508 million.
The risk-adjusted calculation weights each element by its probability. The Phase 2 cost of $30 million is certain. The Phase 3 cost of $110 million occurs only with 45% probability, the regulatory cost only with 27%, and the sales only with about 21%. Discounting each at 11% over its timing gives a risk-adjusted net present value of about $41 million.
The Unadjusted Figure
If the company's sales forecast were discounted at 11% assuming success, ignoring the probability of failure, the program would appear to be worth about $400 million after development costs. The difference between $400 million and $41 million is the value of risk that the unadjusted figure ignores. Investors who priced the round on the unadjusted figure would overpay severely.
The Value of Stopping
The table treats later spending as contingent: Harbor Point spends on Phase 3 only if Phase 2 succeeds. This is an abandonment option of the kind examined earlier in the course (Trigeorgis, 1996). If the company were forced to commit to both trials now, the risk-adjusted value would fall sharply, because the $110 million Phase 3 cost would be spent in the 55% of cases where Phase 2 fails. Staging the investment, and financing each stage separately, is what keeps the program's value positive.
Sensitivity to the Key Inputs
The result is fragile in two directions. If the Phase 2 success probability were 35% rather than 45%, the cumulative probability of approval would fall to about 16% and the risk-adjusted value to roughly $26 million. If it were 55%, value would rise to about $58 million. Peak sales matter as much: a disease population smaller than expected, or a competitor reaching the market first, could cut peak sales by a third and remove most of the value. Investors should treat $41 million as a midpoint in a wide range and should look closely at the evidence behind both inputs, including natural history studies of the disease and the competitive pipeline.
Why Rare Disease Programs Differ
Rare disease programs often have higher success rates than average, in part because many target well-understood biological causes, and regulatory programs for orphan drugs can offer incentives such as market exclusivity after approval. Trials enroll fewer patients and can cost less. These features are reflected in the probabilities and costs used here; applying averages for common diseases would undervalue the program.
Guidance for Investors
Investors in the $30 million Phase 2 round are buying into a program worth about $41 million on a risk-adjusted basis today, with most of the value contingent on Phase 2 results. A successful Phase 2 would roughly double the cumulative probability of approval and raise the program's value several times, which is why biotech financings are staged around trial results. Investors should negotiate terms that reflect that the round funds the riskiest remaining step, and should understand that the estimate is highly sensitive to the Phase 2 success probability and to peak sales.
Conclusion
Valuing research and development requires confronting how often it fails. Published success rates and cost estimates show that a drug candidate with a promising Phase 1 still has only about one chance in five of reaching patients. Weighting cash flows by that probability gives a value of about $41 million, a fraction of the unadjusted figure, and staging the investment around trial results is what makes the program financeable.
References
DiMasi, J. A., Grabowski, H. G., & Hansen, R. W. (2016). Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs. Journal of Health Economics, 47, 20-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.01.012
Trigeorgis, L. (1996). Real options: Managerial flexibility and strategy in resource allocation. MIT Press.
Wong, C. H., Siah, K. W., & Lo, A. W. (2019). Estimation of clinical trial success rates and related parameters. Biostatistics, 20(2), 273-286. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxx069
What the BUS 552 Module 8 instructions ask for
Aspen's catalog for BUS 552 lists research and development investing among the course's applications, so the closing paper prices a research program in a way that takes failure seriously. Your classroom provides the specific Module 8 directions; this example values one drug candidate. Describe the program and its stages. Use published evidence on success rates and costs for comparable research. Build a table that shows, for each stage, the cost, the probability of advancing and the cumulative probability of reaching the market. Weight each cash flow by the probability that it occurs and discount it. Compare the result with an unadjusted forecast. Show how decisions at each stage add value. Explain how investors should use the valuation in a financing round.
Inside the BUS 552 Module 8 example
The paper opens with Harbor Point Therapeutics, its oral drug for a rare inflammatory skin disease and its completed Phase 1 trial. Wong, Siah and Lo's Biostatistics article supplies success rates from a large dataset, including much higher rates for some rare disease programs than for cancer. DiMasi, Grabowski and Hansen's Journal of Health Economics article explains why development costs are high once failures and time are counted. A table lists Phase 2, Phase 3 and regulatory review with their costs, durations and probabilities of advancing, giving a cumulative probability of about 21% from today to approval. Weighting projected sales of about $900 million a year at peak by that probability and discounting at 11% gives about $41 million, compared with about $400 million if success were assumed. A section shows that the option to stop after a failed Phase 2 adds value, and the conclusion advises investors.
BUS 552 Module 8 rubric: what earns full marks
A research valuation stands or falls on believable odds of success, a correct risk-adjusted calculation, a clear table and sound interpretation of the gap between adjusted and unadjusted values. This example takes its success rates from Wong, Siah and Lo's Biostatistics study and its cost context from DiMasi, Grabowski and Hansen's Journal of Health Economics article, citing both where used. The phase table shows costs, probabilities and cumulative odds, so the grader can see how the risk-adjusted value is built. Comparing it with an unadjusted forecast demonstrates why ignoring failure risk produces misleading values. The discussion of staging connects to earlier real options modules, and the investor guidance shows the student can turn a valuation into terms for a financing round.
BUS 552 Module 8 help from the desk
A common error in Module 8 is applying a high discount rate to unadjusted cash flows instead of weighting cash flows by the probability of success. In research and development, failure risk is largely specific to the project and is better handled by probabilities at each stage, with a discount rate reflecting market risk. Cite your success rates and say whether they match the disease area and stage. Remember that costs in later stages occur only if earlier stages succeed, so they are weighted by the probability of reaching them. Show the cumulative probability clearly. Include the timing of cash flows, since development takes years. Discuss the value of stopping after a failed stage. Finally, present the result as an estimate with wide uncertainty, because probabilities and sales forecasts are both uncertain.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More BUS 552 and MBA sample papers
- BUS 552 Module 1: How Venture Capital Works
- BUS 552 Module 2: Valuing Early-Stage Ventures
- BUS 552 Module 3: Term Sheets and Deal Structure
- BUS 552 Module 4: Monte Carlo Analysis
- BUS 552 Module 5: Real Options
- BUS 552 Module 6: Binomial Trees
- BUS 552 Module 7: Game Theory in Venture Decisions
- BUS 551 Module 8: International Corporate Finance
- BUS 553 Module 8: Multinational Working Capital
- BUS 532 Module 4: Segmentation and Service Lines
- BUS 540 Module 7: Decisions Under Risk
BUS 552 Module 8 questions, answered
What does BUS 552 Module 8 usually ask for?
Aspen's BUS 552 ends with valuing research and development, so valuing a research program, often a drug or technology candidate, with methods that account for the chance of failure is typical. Follow your classroom prompt.
What is risk-adjusted net present value?
A valuation that weights each future cash flow by the probability that the project survives to produce it, then discounts the results, commonly used for drug development.
How often do drug candidates reach approval?
Wong, Siah and Lo estimated an overall probability of about 13.8% for programs entering Phase 1, with large differences by disease area.
Where can I find a free BUS 552 Module 8 sample paper?
The complete valuation appears above: a biotech startup's lead drug candidate valued phase by phase with published success rates, a cumulative probability of about 21% and a risk-adjusted value of about $41 million.
Why is the unadjusted value so much higher?
Because it assumes the drug succeeds, while most candidates fail; weighting by the probability of success reduces expected value substantially.